Hey!Hi @Abbie Whitlock, I hope you’re well! I had a couple ofquestions as I’m preparing for my W&C interview, if that’s okay.
For my “Why W&C” answer, my first reason currently focuses on the firm’s strength in Corporate/M&A and its investment in private equity. Do you think that’s a sensible angle, given that it’s an area that the firm is actively building out and growing in, or would it be better to focus on areas it is stronger in and already particularly known for, such as project finance or capital markets?
My second reason focuses on the firm’s global reach and platform. Do you think two reasons are sufficient for this question, or would you recommend adding a third? For example, I was considering mentioning the guaranteed international secondment - would it make sense to include that within the global platform point, or is it better framed under training philosophy as a separate reason?
Also, when asked about practice areas I’m interested in, would it be better to stay aligned with my “Why W&C” answer and say Corporate/PE, or is it fine to say something different such as energy and litigation/arbitration? I’m just conscious of whether that might come across as inconsistent.
Sorry for the multiple questions, and thank you so much in advance for your help!
I am well, thank you - hope you are too! Of course, more than happy to answer any questions
I'd say that focusing on Corporate / M&A and PE is a sensible angle, especially if you frame your answer around the firm's growth and investment in that area. You don't have to default to project finance or capital markets just because they are well known, and it shows that you are thinking about its long-term strategy, not just its historic strengths.
Two strong reasons should usually be enough! I'd keep global platform as one point and include the guaranteed international secondment within that, as evidence of how the global reach translates into training. Including more depth in your answer is more important than adding a third reason for the sake of it.
On practice areas, some alignment helps, but I wouldn't say it is completely necessary. You don't have to be rigid, but your interests should feel coherent alongside your reasons for choosing the firm. However, if you are able to explain why you are interested in energy or litigation / arbitration and can link this to your past experiences or what you hope to do in your future career, then I don't think this would come across as inconsistent. Ultimately, you will do multiple seats in your training contract, so it is a good idea to show that you are open-minded and interested in a few different areas.
Best of luck with your application!